"Considering the great dangers that are likely to occur, more ambitious measures have to be taken in the short term to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to protect the life and family life of citizens in the Netherlands," the court said in a statement reported by The Associated Press.

The original case was brought by the environmental group Urgenda, representing 900 Dutch citizens. The Netherlands' liberal government, lead by Mark Rutte, plans to reduce emissions 17 percent by 2020, The Guardian reported, but now two courts have agreed with Urgenda that that is not enough.

"The special report of the IPCC emphasizes that we need to reduce emissions with much greater urgency. The Dutch government knows that as a low-lying country, we are on the frontline of climate change. Our own government agencies recently concluded that in the worst case scenario sea levels might rise by 2.5 to three meters (approximately eight to 10 feet) by the end of the century. The court of appeal's decision puts all governments on notice. They must act now, or they will be held to account," Urgenda Director Marjan Minnesma told The Guardian.

The ruling could have consequences for similar cases around the world, in countries as widely distributed as New Zealand, Norway, Uganda and the UK.

"Governments can no longer make promises they don't fulfill. Countries have an obligation to protect their citizens against climate change. That makes this trial relevant for all other countries," Dutch Green leader Jesse Klaver told The Guardian.

In the U.S., the Trump administration is attempting to stall the climate liability case Juliana v. United States, being brought by Our Children's Trust on behalf of 21 young people who assert their constitutional rights have been violated by the federal government, which is aware of the dangers of climate change but continues to promote the use of fossil fuels.

The case is scheduled to go to trial Oct. 29, but the federal government filed a motion requesting a stay Friday until the Supreme Court can review the case, The Register-Guard reported.

Both the 9th Circuit and Supreme Court ruled in July the case could proceed to trial, so lawyers for the plaintiffs think it is unlikely the government's delays will succeed, despite this weekend's confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Attorney Philip Gregory told the Register-Guard Monday that a different decision was "doubtful" "given the fact that Justice (Anthony) Kennedy and the rest of the court, less than three months ago, determined the case should proceed forward to trial."

Back in the Netherlands, the Dutch government issued a statement Tuesday saying it would review the ruling for grounds for a further appeal, but also said that it would comply with the court's order and that a 25 percent emissions reduction by 2020 was "within reach," The Associated Press reported.

Minnesma recommended the government shut down coal-fired plants and reduce maximum speeds on some highways.

Sixteen-year-old climate action leader Greta Thunberg stood alongside European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker Thursday in Brussels as he indicated—after weeks of climate strikes around the world inspired by the Swedish teenager—that the European Union has heard the demands of young people and pledged more than $1 trillion over the next seven years to address the crisis of a rapidly heating planet.

In the financial period beginning in 2021, Juncker said, the EU will devote a quarter of its budget to solving the crisis.

A new study reveals the health risks posed by the making, use and disposal of plastics. Jeffrey Phelps / Getty Images

With eight million metric tons of plastic entering the world's oceans every year, there is growing concern about the proliferation of plastics in the environment. Despite this, surprisingly little is known about the full impact of plastic pollution on human health.

But a first-of-its-kind study released Tuesday sets out to change that. The study, Plastic & Health: The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet, is especially groundbreaking because it looks at the health impacts of every stage in the life cycle of plastics, from the extraction of the fossil fuels that make them to their permanence in the environment. While previous studies have focused on particular products, manufacturing processes or moments in the creation and use of plastics, this study shows that plastics pose serious health risks at every stage in their production, use and disposal.